User talk:Nev1/Archives/March–April 2011

Afd Closure

Hey, If you would not mind, can you close this AfD nomination. I have withdrawn the nomination, but since I am an involved editor, I don't think I can close the discussion myself. Thanks, Yes Michael? •^Talk 15:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I think that's done. Nev1 (talk) 15:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Yes Michael? •^Talk 15:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

- for the congrats Nev. It was a rough ride, but I got there in the finish! --Kudpung (talk) 18:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Interesting link;

Evening mate, hope you are well! I was browsing the net looking for good Lancashire stuff when I came across this lovely image [1] and then buckled at the comment below it. How silly of people in 1890 to take a picture of a coal car with such a glaring mistake on their coach plate. Good job Jemmy is there 120 years after the fact to point out their schoolboy error! :D Koncorde (talk) 00:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Special Forces

Just a note to say thanks for the article protection.Jim Sweeney (talk) 20:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Lancashire

nev1 you must realise that Bolton and Bury are in the Historic County of Lancashire,so it would be helpful if you stopped vandalizing pages by saying they have now nothing to do with Lancashire at all when they do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.126.14 (talk) 19:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts on article title...

Evening - hope all is well. I was wondering if I could seek your advice... I've been working in user-space on a first draft of an article to cover the general theme of castles in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland - sort of what Castles in the United Kingdom promises to do, but doesn't quite. The result is getting close to user-space completion, although there's still some work left to be done before it moves out, as you can see here. I've now begun to turn my attention, however, to what it ought to be called. I'm thinking it ought to be called Castles in the United Kingdom and Ireland, in which case I might be tempted to ultimately copy it into the Castles in the United Kingdom article and request a rename - but I'm not sure of the proper protocol for this sort of thing. Anyway, if you've any thoughts, do let me know. Cheers, Hchc2009 (talk) 20:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I think you're right in identifying castles in the United Kingdom and Ireland as your best choice there given the British Isles naming dispute. Castles in the United Kingdom clearly won't cover the whole thing, so just give me a nudge when you're ready and I'll move the article to a better title. The procedure for a controversial move is to go through WP:RM but I think choosing the right title can avoid that. I've only had a quick over your sandbox, but it looks like a very impressive piece of work. I look forward to seeing the finished version. Nev1 (talk) 00:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Dominic Cork

Thanks for finding a better picture Nev. What are your general thoughts on the article? AssociateAffiliate (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I've finally got round to this and left some comments at the peer review. It's good to see Cork finally has a decent article, although I had to read the bits about Lancashire finishing runners up time and again from between my fingers. Nev1 (talk) 18:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

World Cup Table

The world cup point tables have always highlighted the qualifying teams and not the non-qualified teams. Its understood that the non-green teams are not qualified.

user:Anaxagoras13, user:Ordinary Person and user:David Biddulph are trying to mark the unqualified teams in red. My attempts have them discuss the issue first have failed. Could you intervene you and sort things out? Thanks. --ashwinikalantri ^talk 07:31, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

It looks like there's already consensus from the discussion on Talk:2011 Cricket World Cup to use red/pink to highlight teams that can't qualify (as opposed to still able to qualify, but not through yet). Sometimes we don't like the result but still have to abide by it. Nev1 (talk) 11:34, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! ashwinikalantri ^talk 19:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Inflation

In the late 12th century and early 13th century, the English pound was a commodity money, equivalent to about 11.25 troy ounces silver, so the 1264 value is quite appropriate for a very rough, order-of-magnitude estimate. Sources referenced in Economics of English Mining in the Middle Ages and Economy of England in the Middle Ages mention a boom of silver mining during this period, but a quick check shows no mention of any significant increases in the price level, only of expanded output. However, I am going to refrain from adding conversions for such early times and wait for additional input on this issue. --Hupaleju (talk) 14:41, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Ed talks about real-world collaborations and how you can help

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:25, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Archive

The discussions on the World Cup talk page are all over with the official word about the QF positions. Shouldnt they be archived to make way for new discussions? ashwinikalantri ^talk 18:02, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

At least this issue has not been addressed. Please take more care in archiving. Leaving the threads in place will not cause harm. Nev1 (talk) 18:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

It has! The necessary changes have also been made. --ashwinikalantri ^talk 18:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks and FYI

[2] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

If it starts up again after the block expires I'll happily add a much longer one. Nev1 (talk) 14:13, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

And thanks from me. Dougweller (talk) 14:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

FLC

You may be interested to know that I have nominated List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the East of England at FLC. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Good stuff, I'll take a look later this evening. Nev1 (talk) 18:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't finished looking through that, but I'll get to it later. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 19:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I've been a bit premature in the nomination; but I guess your interests in the list won't conflict too much. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Not premature at all. I'm about one-third of the way through the list and so far I've been very impressed. Malleus Fatuorum 20:24, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I let this slip by for so long; I started reading through but got sidetracked. Anyway, I've left some comments, nothing major. It's another impressive piece of work. Nev1 (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

An invite

Hi Nev, can I tempt you (and your camera?) to Derby?, hope to see you at Derby Museum on the 9th. Sign up for free lunch, tour etc Victuallers (talk) 19:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I had been thinking about going as it happens, but it depends on where I am in the country at the time. Unfortunately, I can't guarantee being within an easy travelling distance but if I am it looks worth attending. Would I need to sign up in advance? Nev1 (talk) 19:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You may be OK but I am trying to fill the seats. Maybe best to put your name down and withdraw if necessary. I believe we will have some novel technology to show which hasnt been seen elsewhere before. Be good to meet. Victuallers (talk) 04:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful - see you there. Looking foward to seeing what all these people look like. Victuallers (talk) 15:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Tendulkar

Sorry, your reverts do not go fair enough. Can you also either revert the 450th match update by Naveen kembanur, or update the citation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.197.91.203 (talk) 22:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, the stats in the infobox should now be up to date. Nev1 (talk) 22:39, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protection of the article is not enough, maybe it should be fully protected. After all, most of the edits you've highlighted are from registered users failing to update the article fully whenever SRT has scored some runs or taken some wickets, or even merely played a game.

In this case semi-protection is there to prevent the article from vandalism; as he's a high-profile sportsman his article attracts a lot of attention. The reason it was semi-protected in the first place was to prevent vandalism. Well-intentioned edits, such as only partially updating the stats, are a problem of a different kind and as you say registered editors seem as culpable in this respect as non-registered. Full-protection would preserve the article in its current state so that only admins can edit it directly and somewhat counter productive. Nev1 (talk) 16:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

QF Bracket

Sorry to bother you again, but we need a third opinion here. PeeJay is jumbling the match sequence according to his whims. Others have also complained, but he would keep reverting without replying to the discussions. Hope that you can sort this out. ashwinikalantri ^talk 07:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Expansion done...

Ref our earlier conversation on names, I've now moved an updated version of Castles in the United Kingdom out of user space and into the main article... Hchc2009 (talk) 08:33, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I've moved the article, so no need to go through the rigmarole of WP:RM. That's a very substantial article so I'll take a proper look tomorrow after I've dealt with Rodw's request below. I do have one question now though: have you thought about how you're going to link articles into this one? The state it was in before, it wasn't much use to anyone so the ~800 views a month it got seemed incidental, however given the obvious quality of this new material I think it should be more prominent. Nev1 (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Cheers. I'd begun to put some thought in to this week (was away travelling on work); I'll take a stab at some linking over the weekend. Any ideas welcomed though! Hchc2009 (talk) 12:32, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

List of hill forts and ancient settlements in Somerset & English Heritage Book of Maiden Castle

It would be great if you could take another look at List of hill forts and ancient settlements in Somerset which is lurching towards FLC. In particular there are some comments on the talk page about "It has been argued that they could have been military sites constructed in response to invasion from continental Europe" & "domestic purposes as well as a defensive role." which came from the blurb you had developed for other hillfort articles. I don't have a copy of the "English Heritage Book of Maiden Castle" which they seem to be referenced to & I was wondering whether you could expand/reword or respond to the comments on the talk page?— Rod ^talk 16:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem, I'll pop to the library tomorrow and see what the book says then respond to the comments. Nev1 (talk) 18:04, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks & no worries about the delay - its still nowhere near ready for FLC. The paragraph is based on your Maiden castle one but has been changed by several editors since.— Rod ^talk 18:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Consistent misunderstading

Please, leave the article in it's original form please give me 1 day's time. I am a busy man. If you want ask an admin to step in, I will merely explain this to him/her. I have other commitments at at 21:32 GMT on 2nd Aprli 2011, if i have failed to take action or show action you can remove the edits. (Wiki id2(talk) 20:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC))

I'm failing to see why you won't trust me, this isn't helpful I'm sorry if i can't find time, and please understand I am not pleading to you, I am telling you if you do not understand my arguement then please discuss with an admin. I have no problems (Wiki id2(talk) 17:28, 31 March 2011 (UTC))

Undoing the split on the Shakib Al Hasan article

This is what I have to say. Ratibgreat (talk) 14:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Selkcerf0142

I notice that you reverted contributions by User:Selkcerf0142 to Clitheroe Castle on the grounds of cut and paste copyright violations. Could I ask you to take a similar look at de Lacy, before I use any of it in Honor of Clitheroe. TIA --Trappedinburnley (talk) 12:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I just removed the second sentence of the de Lacy article as a copyright violation, so given the problems with the Clitheroe Castle article I wouldn't copy any of the article's content. If I was writing an article on the Honour, I'd start from the ground up. If your library has it, the first volume of the Victoria County History of Lancashire is a good place to start; unfortunately, british-history.ac.uk doesn't have it. There's a little in the third volume, which is online, but it's mostly to say that the first covered the subject in more detail. Nev1 (talk) 13:06, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

It's not getting any better. While this source is out of copyright, it looks like chunks have been copied across with little, or more often, not attribution. The sources may be useful for writing about the Honour, but the Wikipedia article looks like a lost cause and may have to be stubbed. Nev1 (talk) 13:26, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm way ahead of you on the VCH, all 7 volumes are available at www.archive.org --Trappedinburnley (talk) 13:38, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

PS We could revert to this version

I think that's the way to go. The rate this is going at, it seems that everything Selkcerf0142 added was a copyright violation of some sort, or as near as makes no difference, but in some places it's not clear where information is being cited too. Restoring the article to its condition before Selkcerf0142 seems like the best way to proceed. Nev1 (talk) 14:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Jan-Mar 2011

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your help with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Jan-Mar 2011, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:59, 3 April 2011 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Protection Sachin Tendulkar

While I think protection is required in this case indefinite protection seems excessive. The final of the Cricket World Cup was only yesterday, so its not surprising that the article is attracting vandalism today. I think a month would be about right. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:43, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sachin is also just about the most popular Indian cricketer regardless of the time of year or whether there's a World Cup on. Just take a look at the page view stats from January 2011 (before the Cup started) and then look at the levels of vandalism last time the article was unprotected (October 2008). That's unlikely to change any time soon, especially given the final. I honestly think indefinite semi-protection is the way to go. Feel free to reduce it if you feel it's excessive, but I'll bet a penny to a pound that the vandalism will return almost immediately. Nev1 (talk) 16:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I take your point, but I think that its worth a try, and one day after India have just won the cricket world cup is not the day to try it out :). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

A fair point, there's no harm in testing it out later. Nev1 (talk) 16:55, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

World Cup Champions

You have removed the photo of the Indian team receiving the World Cup trophy. I dont see where a free version is available. There were no non-press cameras in the stadium. Even the photo on the Tendulkar page looks like a modified/altered press photo. Just like the 1983 pic, this one wont have a free version. Could you suggest an alternative. ashwinikalantri ^talk 05:40, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Before uploading unfree content you should check if there is a free option available. This image claims to be free, so that at least is worth looking into. If you think it's been incorrectly licensed then you need to tag it for deletion. What are you basing the assertion that there were no non-press cameras at the stadium on? Nev1 (talk) 11:43, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Blackbeard

Any chance you could protect this again? It's a vandal magnet and irritating to deal with. I'd like to see it given some kind of permanent protection, I doubt they'll go away any time soon. Parrot of Doom 15:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Done. 47 edits with minimal constructive change isn't worth the hassle. Nev1 (talk) 15:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. It was only going to get worse as the PotC film gets nearer. Parrot of Doom 15:11, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Even without the film the article's got a long history being vandalised and I don't see that changing any time soon which is why I went for indefinite semi-protection. Nev1 (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Kommissar Hjuler shall become deleted?

Hello, I am Kommissar Hjuler, I have an account here for sometime, but only now started to work by myself on the article someone started on me. Also made some articles on my wife Mama Baer, Dietmar Kirves, a colleague at the NO!art Movement and Barbara Rapp, another colleague.

I edited some info on NO!art, I am a member of NO!art, also in contact with Clayton Patterson and Dietmar Kirves, both are the leaders today, and both agreed for all changes.

I try to learn by doing, but anytime I open the artice, I am told, that I violated some rules.

I hope I did not, I am not sure, how I violated any rules, and now I am told, that the article can become deleted.

I need any help I can get,

Kommissar Hjuler mamabaer-hjuler@versanet.de—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.91.129.7 (talk) 06:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Another FL

Thanks for your review and support at FLC for List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the East of England. This has (at last) been promoted; a task made more difficult by the CCT completely changing its website in the middle of the process. Only one list left now to complete the set — SE England! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Barnstars

Please may I have a barnstar please? Seesawmajorydoor (talk) 18:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Venues

There seem to be a little problem with the venue section in the Cricket World Cup articles. Karyasuman, seems to want a fancy table with a lot of pictures, and is not ready to discuss. Will be great if you can sort things out. ashwinikalantri ^talk 18:52, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

You'd probably have had more luck interacting with Karyasuman if you hadn't archived the talk page two minutes after you started a thread. On most watchlists, that hides the edit that started the thread. I really couldn't care less about whether the table is blue, pink, gold, or plain but I've left a note on Karyasuman's talk page. In future, if someone doesn't respond on an article's talk page they may have missed what you said; it's harder to miss a message on your user talk page when there's a big orange bar telling you about it. Nev1 (talk) 19:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Your kind words dont seem to be working with Karyasuman. His rampage continues, also on 2007 Cricket World Cup‎. ashwinikalantri ^talk 19:50, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Rcsprinter123

I've made a pledge not to review anymore GANs, or do any "bad" edits until this time next year. I'll just focus on writing articles in userspace, and then promoting them for a bit. I'm also going on a two week WikiBreak soon too. ^{Userboxes can be misleading. Age.} Sorry, Nev1/Archives. Rcsprinter^{Gimme a message} 15:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

First Crusade

Clueless newbie or annoying vandal, either way, someone's adding a lot of stuff to the lead and I've hit two reverts... someone have a hand here? Ealdgyth - Talk 19:30, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The change was a copyright violation so no one needs to worry about breaking 3RR as it doesn't apply in this case. Hchc2009's taken care of the revert, and I've asked the user not to add copyrighted material. Hopefully that will sort it. Nev1 (talk) 19:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

User has now been blocked for repeatedly adding copyrighted material despite being asked not to. Nev1 (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nev1. You have new messages at Philg88's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi both of you. I have added a comment on Phil's talk page. Chaosdruid (talk) 21:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

glad you are still there

Hi

Just started so would appreciate a quick check of the lead (only bit I have done so far)

Also there seems to be a problem (possibly?) with the dashes script we normally use - it wants to replace "defending against civil war artillery&mdashalthough major castles such as Edinburgh" with "...artillery—although major..." - is this not correct? If this is in fact a mistake then it needs raising as an issue as this script is the one that most copy-editors are using to fix dashes.

I will run it now and you can tell me if there are any other problems raised by its use if you have time. If there are major problems we can just undo the changes it makes and do them manually

Chaosdruid (talk) 01:17, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Your changes to the lead look fine by me, but it's not my article so I'd run it by Hchc2009 to double check. I don't think it's a problem with the script, it's just this one occurrence of an em dash. The em dashes (there were more, but I think I undid most of them) were introduced by Philg88; the article used spaced en dashes (take a look the third footnote) so this made the article inconsistent. I've fixed that and don't think there are any more to worry about. Em dashes are fine per MOS:DASH, they're a stylistic alternative to spaced en dashes in parenthesis, the problem was inconsistency with the rest of the article. Nev1 (talk) 01:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Cheers for that, and the fixes this late at night lol - I am off to bed now so will carry on in the morning. I tend to do my edits section by section so any problems can be easily rectified. Looks like we are on track though! As you say I will hope that Hchc finds the copyedit ok, maybe they will be online to comment before I start again tomorrow, probably around 12:00 UTC Chaosdruid (talk) 01:41, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I was just about to sign off when I saw what needed doing, but it was a simple thing to do so no point in waiting till tomorrow. Nev1 (talk) 01:43, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Looking good to me. I've some time off this week, so I may go through and do a scrub to see if I can identify any bits that could be moved off into the relevant main article(s). Hchc2009 (talk) 06:11, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

law school template

I think your edit/protection to the law school info box has messed up the protocol. Please check.--S. Rich (talk) 00:10, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that, it should be ok now. Nev1 (talk) 00:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

I was going around in a crazy, maddening circle! What on earth was wrong with the template on the article I was editing!! Thanks for the quick fix!!! --S. Rich (talk) 00:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Jet (song)

You may also wish to add a protection template to this article? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I've protected that article too. Nev1 (talk) 19:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. Any advice about this user? Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

All of Bartbart1's 47 undeleted edits are to the Joan Armatrading article, there's been no attempt in Bartbart1's part to engage in discussion. If the they keep removing sourced material and not responding to talk page messages, they'll be blocked. I'll keep an on the Armatrading article but if I'm not around you might want to take it to WP:ANI and explain the situation there. Nev1 (talk) 20:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, many thanks. I am fast running out of three reverts in one go. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for CrossTempleJay's userpage protection

Thanks for granting my request.--CrossTempleJay (talk) 21:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Real Madrid Squad

Hi I see that you have changed the protection level on the page but can you please change emmanuel adebayor back to number 6 he only changes numbers in the champions league because he was a new transfer this season his real number is 6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FGaribay7 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Polite request

Would you consider protecting Caphouse Colliery from an IP troll who I appear to have upset at some time or other?--J3Mrs (talk) 23:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I've semi-protected the article for a week. I can't believe an editor is seriously suggesting wages and owners are not relevant to an article on a colliery. Nev1 (talk) 09:43, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Nev, appreciated.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)